Exelon Corporation Building Value – The Exelon Way

1. Exelon CorporationBuilding Value – The Exelon Way John W. Rowe Chairman & Chief Executive Officer Exelon Investor Conference New York City August 6, 2003

2. Forward-Looking Statements This presentation contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, that are subject to risks and uncertainties. The factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements made by a registrant include those discussed herein as well as those discussed in Exelon Corporation’s 2002 Annual Report on Form 10-K in (a) ITEM 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Business Outlook and the Challenges in Managing Our Business for Exelon, ComEd, PECO and Generation and (b) ITEM 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data: Exelon—Note 19, ComEd—Note 16, PECO—Note 18 and Generation—Note 13, and (c) other factors discussed in filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) by Exelon Corporation, Commonwealth Edison Company, PECO Energy Company and Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Registrants). Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which apply only as of the date of this presentation. None of the Registrants undertakes any obligation to publicly release any revision to its forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this presentation.

4. Total Return Comparisons 1/1/00 – 6/30/03 Source: Bloomberg

5. John W. Rowe Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, Exelon Corp Robert S. Shapard Oliver D. Kingsley, Jr. Pamela B. Strobel Elizabeth Anne Moler EVP & Chief President & Chief EVP & Chief EVP, Government & Financial Officer, Operating Officer, Administrative Officer, Regulation, Exelon Corp Exelon Corp Exelon Corp Exelon Corp S. Gary Snodgrass Randall E. Mehrberg SVP & Chief Human EVP & General Counsel, Resources Officer, Exelon Corp Exelon Corp The Exelon Way Team Ian P. McLean EVP, Exelon Corp; President, Power Team, Exelon Generation

7. Building on Success Low-cost generation portfolio Large, stable retail customer base No material trading or international exposure Strong balance sheet Positioned to deliver 5% annual earnings growth Experienced management to take Exelon to the next level of excellence – The Exelon Way

8. Today’s Agenda Building Value – The Exelon Way 8:00 a.m.–8:30 a.m. John W. Rowe – Introduction and Strategic Overview 8:30 a.m.–9:00 a.m. Oliver D. Kingsley, Jr. – Operating Overview 9:00 a.m.–9:15 a.m. Michael B. Bemis – Energy Delivery Regulatory Overview 9:15 a.m.–9:30 a.m. John W. Rowe – Evolving Regulatory Framework 9:30 a.m.–10:00 a.m. Break 10:00 a.m.–10:20 a.m. John F. Young – Generation Strategy 10:20 a.m.–10:40 a.m. Ian P. McLean – Portfolio Optimization and Risk Management 10:40 a.m.–11:10 a.m. Robert S. Shapard – Financial Overview 11:10 a.m.–12:00 p.m. John W. Rowe – Wrap-up/Q&A

9. Operating Overview Oliver D. Kingsley, Jr. President & Chief Operating Officer Exelon Investor Conference New York City August 6, 2003

10. Total: 40,764 MW (1) 28,003 MW Operating 12,761 MW Contracted MAIN: 20,164 MW Total 11,028 MW Operating 9,136 MW Contracted NPCC: 4,066 MW Operating MAAC: 10,665 MW Total 10,415 MW Operating 250 MW Contracted ECAR: 500 MW Contracted ERCOT: 3,674 MW Total 2,494 MW Operating 1,180 MW Contracted SERC: 900 MW Contracted SPP: 795 MW Contracted (1) Based on Exelon Generation’s ownership and long-term contracts at 7/31/03, including AmerGen Energy Company, LLC; excludes investment in Sithe Energies, Inc. Generation Portfolio

11. Largest U.S. Electric Customer Base Total electric customers – 5.1 million 2% 27% 52% 8% 11%

12. 1999 1999 2000 2000 2001 2001 2002 2002 2003 2003 Improved Energy Delivery Operations

13. World-Class Nuclear Operations

14. 11 RFOs 6 RFOs 11 RFOs 3 RFOs Focus on Operational Excellence RFOs-Refueling outages

15. Improvement in Exelon Power

16. Opportunity for Additional Improvement – Energy Delivery SAIFI – 2001 industry actuals; 2002 Exelon actuals American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) – 2002 actuals

17. Exelon Power units are not consistently top quartile in their peer groups Actions: Fleet-wide material condition assessment completed Human performance initiatives Standard programs, processes Asset-by-asset portfolio review underway Opportunity for Improvement – Exelon Power Data: GKS (Generation Knowledge System) benchmarking community

18. Opportunity for Improvement – Exelon Nuclear Of the 11 large nuclear fleet operators, Exelon Nuclear was: Lowest cost 2nd lowest cost 5th lowest cost 6th lowest cost • Exelon Nuclear is closing the production cost gap to top performance compared with other major operators • Continued focus on refueling outage execution, forced loss rate, operational excellence Highest cost Data: Electric Utility Cost Group

19. The Exelon Way Goals • Achieve top-quartile operating and financial performance excellence as measured by industry metrics • Deliver at least $300 million in annual cash flow improvement from O&M and Cap Ex by 2004 • Grow to more than $600 million in annual cash flow improvement by 2006 Strategy • Reshape the Exelon business model to maximize consolidation and integration synergies • Create a high-performance organization and culture of excellence • Standardize, simplify and strengthen underlying business management processes • Put the management in place to make it happen • Aggressively pursue significant and sustainable cash flow improvement

20. The New Play Book • Standard best programs and processes • Reduce resource requirements, duplication; capture synergies • Effective process management • Enable sustained and replicable good performance • Rigorous performance management • Focus on productivity improvement • Operational improvement and organizational alignment is driving sustainable cost reduction It’s working in Nuclear. It’s producing results in Power. It’s being defined & implemented in Energy Delivery. The Exelon Way is driving it company-wide.

21. Genco Operations and Alignment – What’s Different? • Nuclear – Continued focus on top performance • Power – Optimization and execution • Power/Power Team market alignment • Regional asset rationalization • Sales and Marketing • Enhanced marketing focus and leadership in all regions

22. EED Operations and Alignment – What’s Different? • EED will complete the merger • $500 million uncaptured savings potential in O&M and capital • EED is developing and implementing the model • Consolidated organization structure with clear accountabilities • Focus on the basics: events, errors, fundamental standards • Leadership team and 18 process teams are driving business/organization integration

23. Supply Chain: > $2 billion total non-fuel spend in 2002 ~ 750 full-time employees ~ $80 million operating costs Integrated supply chain organization will deliver increased value Eliminate redundancy Strategic sourcing and category management Inventory management Vehicle fleet management e-Business payment channel Headcount reductions Sustainable savings opportunities 2004–2006: $120-180 million Corporate Support and Alignment – What’s Different?

24. Information Technology: ~ $500 million Exelon IT spend in 2002 ~ 1,200 Exelon and contractor resources New structure consolidates IT, eliminates redundancies Re-prioritize, manage IT project spend Consolidate and reduce headcount Standardize infrastructure and processes Leverage the right outsourcing opportunities Strengthen governance Manage demand Sustainable savings opportunities 2004–2006: $50-70 million Corporate Support and Alignment – What’s Different?

25. Exelon Energy DeliveryRegulatory Overview Michael B. Bemis President, Exelon Energy Delivery Exelon Investor Conference New York City August 6, 2003

26. Current Regulatory Structure ComEd The Illinois Electric Service Customer Choice and Rate Relief Law of 1997 Transition period through 2006 Last pre-restructuring rate case – 1994 test year PECO Energy Electricity Generation Customer Choice and Competition Act – 1996 Restructuring Settlement Agreement – 1998 Transition period through 2010 Last pre-restructuring electric rate case – 3/90 test year Last gas rate case – 1988

27. PECO Transition Structure Generation rate cap expires January 1, 2011 Distribution rate cap expires January 1, 2007 $5.26 billion of stranded investment collected on 12-year amortization schedule with 10.75% return Annual reconciliation of Competitive Transition Charge (CTC) Stranded investment is not recomputed Returns (net income) decrease over time: $137 million in 2003 to $3 million in 2010

28. ComEd Transition Structure Established a “transition period” through 2006 Provided an opportunity to recover stranded costs, but did not predetermine the amount Recovery mechanisms included: Bundled Rate freeze though 2004 (later extended to 2006) Collection of CTCs from shopping customers using “revenues lost” approach Flexibility to restructure and transfer assets Ability to issue transition bonds securitized by the total regulated revenue stream Established ROE cap with earnings-sharing mechanism

29. “Revenues Lost” Approach Determines CTC Revenue Market-Based Revenues during transition period (absent CTC) Regulated Revenues (from Bundled Rate Customers) Mitigation Factor Revenues Lost(recovered by CTC) CTC Energy (MVEC – Market Value Energy Component) Delivery Services Note: Regulated Revenues represent the average residential revenue/MWh for 2003, which was used for all periods. Other data represents actual averages for historical periods and hypothetical averages for future periods, based on assumption that current factors will not change. Hypothetical data are used for illustrative purposes only and they do not represent Exelon's projections for future rates.

30. 2003 ComEd Regulatory Settlement Addressed major issues awaiting regulatory action: Constructively concluded ComEd Residential Delivery Services rate case Modified calculation of CTC revenue for shopping customers Facilitated extension of full-requirements PPA between ComEd and Generation through 2006 Facilitated continued collection of decommissioning charge revenue through 2006 Supported Provider of Last Resort (POLR) provisions Provided funding for energy-related programs in Illinois

31. Evolving Regulatory Framework John W. Rowe Chairman & Chief Executive Officer Exelon Investor Conference New York City August 6, 2003

32. Electric Industry Ratemaking Evolution Post Transition Traditional Transition All electric services bundled Rates based on assets owned AFUDC Used and useful Prudency review Separation of regulated and competitive businesses Hybrid of traditional ratemaking and market pricing Stranded investment recovery CTC MVEC Shopping credit Mitigation factor Regulated T&D rates Market-based commodity pricing Rates based on services provided Retail risk management adder Energy procurement charge Customer switching premium A new bundled rate agreement

33. Post-Transition Strategy 2003 Regulatory Operating Financial Transmission rate case Earnings and cash flow growth The Exelon Way Delivery services rate case Optimize generation value Balance sheet re-engineering Socialize issues and solutions 2007

34. The “Status Quo” Scenario Lack of full recovery on T&D service No long-term risk management services High risk for customers(no rate certainty) 7.7 cents 6.4 cents 2.5 cents Avg. T&D Charge Avg. bundled retail rev/kWh 3.9 cents Market-based Energy Charge 2002 2007 Note: Numbers represent actual average data for historical periods and hypothetical data for future periods, based on assumption that current factors will not change. Hypothetical numbers are used for illustrative purposes only and they do not represent Exelon's projections for future rates.

35. The “Full-Value Recognition” Scenario Average bundled rate below inflation-adjusted 1996 level Full recovery of T&D costs Market-based energy price Compensation for risk management services 8.1 cents 7.7 cents Services Avg. T&D Charge Avg. bundled retail rev/kWh Market-based Energy Charge 2002 2007 Note: Numbers represent actual average data for historical periods and hypothetical data for future periods. Hypothetical numbers are used for illustrative purposes only and they do not represent Exelon's projections for future rates.

36. Building Value – The Exelon Way

37. Generation Strategy John F. Young President, Exelon Power Exelon Investor Conference New York City August 6, 2003

38. Exelon Nuclear President: John L. Skolds Operates and maintains Exelon’s nuclear assets Nuclear Capacity: 15,788 MW Exelon Power President: John F. Young Operates and maintains Exelon’s fossil and hydro units Fossil Capacity: 10,631 MW Hydro Capacity: 1,584 MW Power Team President: Ian P. McLean Manages Exelon Generation’s portfolio risk and optimizes near-term margins Contracts under management: 12,761 MW Exelon Generation: An Overview Exelon Generation Competitive energy business of Exelon • Exelon Generation: • A world-class operator of nuclear power generation • A broad based portfolio of gas, oil, coal, wind and hydro generation • A experienced leader in wholesale power marketing and risk management

39. Regional Summary Nuclear Hydro Coal Intermediate Peaker • Well-balanced portfolio in Midwest and Mid Atlantic • Significant generation presence in ERCOT/South and NEPOOL Owned generation includes Exelon’s share of AmerGen and excludes Sithe assets.

40. 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 Evolving Power Markets Energy Policy Act: Emergence of wholesale power markets • California electricity crisis begins • FERC Order 2000 Nymex launches first futures trade • Risk management standards improved – Council of Chief Risk Officers and Sarbanes Oxley • High Growth • Asset lite strategy • Convergence of power and gas markets • Markets become more financial • Access to capital markets • Back to Basics • Markets become more physical • Collapse of the trading business model • The future? • Infancy • Large physical markets • Off-system sales of excess length • Early stages of power trading • Power glut (equilibrium expected in 2009/10) • Financial scandals and problems sweep power industry • Power industry faces credit crunch and growing financial distress First electricity price spike (Midwest markets 6/98) Enron files for bankruptcy (12/01) First reported non-utility power trade • Exelon Generation – Consistent over Time: • Balancing power generation with load and wholesale trading • Asset-led physical strategy and added balance through financial markets • Financial results - What you see is what you get

41. Business Strategy Goals and Objectives Key Skills Exelon Generation’s Strategy Exelon’s Vision To become the best and the most consistently profitable electric and gas company in the United States • Exelon Generation’s Strategy • Create value through proven world class operational excellence and superior market based commercial experience • Goals and Objectives • Generate electricity reliably and at a lower cost than our competitors • Achieve top quartile operating performance on a sustained basis • Optimize investment in assets consistent with market environment • Leverage our commercial expertise to optimize our portfolio and mitigate risk • Key Skills • World class nuclear operations • Demonstrated ability to extract value from fossil and hydro assets • Financial valuation skills across commodities and products • Knowledge of both power and fuels markets

42. Long-Term Portfolio Balance Maximize Exelon Generation Portfolio Value Portfolio Optimization and Risk Management Operational Excellence Generation: Value Creation • Linking generation and load • Continuous rationalization of assets: buy/sell/swap/retire/reinvest • Understanding market dynamics, transmission, customers and environmental issues Assets Assets Assets • Execution of performance enhancement strategy for the entire fleet • Aggressive management of fuel, O&M and capital cost • Reducing uncertainty by physical and financial hedging of power and underlying fuel • Optimizing generation and load portfolio in the wholesale market

43. Portfolio Optimization and Risk Management Ian P. McLean President, Power Team Exelon Investor Conference New York City August 6, 2003

44. Value Added Intermediary Generation Affiliates Wholesale Power Markets Nuclear Fossil ComEd Exelon Power Team PECO Hydro Contracts Fuel Markets Power Team manages the interaction between the generation portfolio and the wholesale customers in order to reduce risk and optimize Exelon Generation profitability in the near term.

45. Approach to Risk Management over Time Risk Management Framework Load Only Long View Long-Term Portfolio Balancing Portfolio Optimization & Risk Management There are three distinct time horizons from which to view risk management. Increasing Approach To Managing Volatility And Optimizing Value In 2003: • Established hedge ratio goal of 80% or more • Grew hedge position to 90+% on average for year For 2004: • Establish portfolio and regional hedge book limits based on earnings-at-risk proxy and considering: • Market liquidity and depth • Internal hedges • Sell forward or utilize options to stay within limits • Optimize positions to provide flexibility and maximize earnings while staying within limits (leave some energy to spot) • Increase hedge ratio in short run • Do not over hedge in any region • Purchase underlying fuel for any forward sales • Risk appetite • Load uncertainty

46. Probability 6% Portfolio with load as a hedge Portfolio with load + forward sales Portfolio with target hedges 5% Margin Uncertainty ($) 4% 3% 2% 1% 0% Range at 90% confidence level -743 -578 -413 -248 -83 83 248 413 578 743 $ Million Risk Management • Risk Issues • Reliability – Meeting load obligations in ComEd, PECO • Financial (All Regions) – • Power Prices & Volatility • Fuel Prices & Volatility • Load & Volatility • Credit Issues Portfolio Characteristics • Generally long – to address full requirements PPAs • Internal load provides 50% fixed price hedge • Internal ComEd CTC hedge and Texas PPAs provide additional protection

47. Plant 2003 Capacity (MW) Avg. Variable Cost ($/MWh) Nuclear 10,678 $4.50 Coal 5,134** $16.00 Intermediate 1,084 $33.00 Peakers* 3,768 $60.00 Total Capacity 20,664 $21.50 Demand Annual GWh (2004) 74,500 Peak Load (MW) 18,350 Midwest Portfolio Chicago Indiana Illinois Market Dynamics The Midwest portfolio is in MAIN and ECAR. • Predominantly a bilateral market • Significant transmission constraints • ComEd integration into PJM (est. 11/03) expected to increase volume of transactions • MAIN: 25% reserve margin, 57,000-MW peak demand, coal = 33% of total capacity • ECAR: 30% reserve margin, 100,000-MW peak demand, coal = 50% of total capacity • Supply/demand equilibrium not expected until 2009/2010 * Assuming $5/MMBtu gas price ** Excludes recent decision to terminate 578 MW of coal options

48. Commodity Impact Comments Natural Gas • Substantial base-load capacity  Long gas position • Gas increasingly on the margin Oil • Oil not significantly on the margin in the region Gas Spark • Relatively insignificant spark capacity as compared to base-load length Oil Spark • Minimal oil capacity in the portfolio Significant Insignificant Midwest: Key Elements ATC – Around the clock

49. Mid-Atlantic Portfolio Pennsylvania New Jersey Maryland Delaware Market Dynamics All the Mid-Atlantic portfolio assets are in the PJM region. • Centrally dispatched power pool • 23% reserve margin, 63,800-MW peak demand (PJM and PJM West) • Coal = 28% of total capacity • Combined-cycle gas turbines (CCGTs) are on the margin a majority of on-peak hours and many summer off-peak hours • Supply/demand equilibrium not expected until 2009/2010 * Assuming $5/MMBtu gas price

50. Mid-Atlantic: Key Elements Significant Insignificant